I
am not much of a gambler. I do run small
businesses, but those are carefully built service and risk plans and are not at
all similar to pulling the lever to see if I get a payout – like video gambling
machines around town. And while I advocate wise financial choices, I don’t
believe in unsolicited financial advice and would never tell anyone how to
spend their hard-earned money.

However,
it seems that our State would. Previously, I wrote about the Secure Choice
Savings Plan that automatically enrolls employees into a privately-run
investment fund. I believe a program
that tells our citizens what to do with their money is an overreach of
government. Each individual or family knows their financial situation and
priorities better than the government and should be given the option to choose
how to save or how to not save their money. What if that 3% taken from a
paycheck meant the difference between paying or not paying for the utilities or
mortgage this month? Our citizens
realize that saving for retirement is important and didn’t need the state to tell
them that.

The
State also provides another way for unsuspecting citizens to spend their money:
video game gambling. While it is not a forced expense by the State, we all know
that it was legalized as yet another method to increase revenue. And for many
of our area residents, it has become an addicting pastime. Here’s how I know
that: in the City of Freeport alone, $50 million dollars were “played” in video
game gambling, according to articles featured in both The Journal Standard and
The Rockford Register Star, generating over $206,000 in tax revenue in 2014.

And
by played, I mean wagered; let us not get confused by the softer, spin
language. I have not yet figured out how
to solve my internal struggle with the financial straits Illinois finds itself
in, the interesting methods Illinois finds of creating tax revenue, and the
presence of video gaming in our communities. Simply, I need your input.

My
first point is that not all of the $50 million came from the pockets of
Freeport citizens. I’m sure there were
out-of-district dollars that stopped into Freeport to support our community and
the businesses that have the video gambling machines. I don’t know what percentage of the $50
million pie comes from outside of town or out-of-state.

Secondly,
I ask, is $206,027.38 enough money in returned tax revenue to justify $50
million gambled in 2014 within the Freeport city limits alone? As a percentage, tax revenue compared to
gambled dollars Freeport only saw 0.4 percent returned home to our city.

Do
you think that 0.4 percent is enough to justify the additional burden being
placed on families destroyed from a gambling addiction? Is one family too many to sacrifice for the
benefit of $206,000 in tax revenue? Sure,
I’m talking about a hypothetical, and human nature says, “that won’t happen to
me,” but I’ve heard from enough addicts during my time with the Sheriff’s
department and I understand the life altering changes that occur from a serious
addiction.

Alternatively,
I ask this: with the fiscal crisis facing the State of Illinois, can we afford
to turn away business and taxing opportunities? Someone out there is making money on gambling,
someone out there is employing people and creating jobs for our community. I appreciate the risks of launching a business
and I appreciate the customer base for frequenting those establishments. Money
spent in our community is a good thing. Also,
$50 million is a strong signal that our neighbors support and enjoy video
gambling.

Finally,
when the State of Illinois has to turn to gambling and selling drugs (medical
marijuana) to fund our schools and fix our roads, do we have a bigger problem
with the direction of our State? I see
this as a simplified version of the recent laws passed, and there are pros and
cons on each side, but I write today to tell you I’m having this internal
struggle. Citizens enjoy spending their
money on gambling; it is a financial risk and reward “game.” Now that we know $50 million nets the city
$206,000 in tax revenue and comes with additional moral implications, is this
worth it for us? There is much more than
this column can address as it relates to the numbers; however you can check out
the information yourself for your community in the 89th District at
the Illinois Gaming Board at www.igb.illinois.gov click on Video
Gaming and then click monthly reports by establishment or municipality.

This
week’s topic reminds of a quote from Hunter S. Thompson: “there are many harsh
lessons to be learned from the gambling experience, but the harshest one of all
is the difference between having FUN and being SMART.”

Two events recently started me thinking
even more than I normally do about our region’s economy. On Wednesday, Highland
Community College’s Leadership Institute met in the meeting space of one of my
buildings. They discussed issues facing Freeport and the surrounding region,
obstacles to economic progress, and catalysts needed for growth. Then, I spent
Thursday morning with The Community Development Fund of Galena at the Desoto
House. Jo Daviess County leaders presented issues facing the Jo Daviess County
and Galena economy and community as well as progress that has been made
recently.

A cause for concern for many leaders in
the 89th district is the shrinking labor force. I can think, in particular, of
a business opportunity I had recently, but, to move forward, I had to be sure I
had an adequate labor pool to draw from. After weeks of research on the part of
my staff, we determined we wouldn’t be able to hire enough people with the
right skill set, so we had to allow the opportunity to pass us by. Our
shrinking labor force is not from a lack of strong families and talented young
people. However, many of our young local talent go to college and then seek
employment in cities with higher paying jobs and with better social activities.
And while I love our region, I can’t blame them. Most college grads these days
are saddled with seemingly insurmountable college debt and those urban salaries
combined with the opportunity to grow their careers seem pretty alluring.

We have to ask ourselves, what can we do
to keep them here and to draw in new talent from across the state and country?
Our promise of easy commutes and little traffic won’t do the trick. And neither
will our current unemployment rates. So what will?

A good start would be building on our
existing higher educational institutions by introducing or further developing
internship and apprenticeship programs into the region. We need more programs
similar to the ones already developed by district-wide organizations to
continue to inspire local students to be successful as well as encouraging them
to develop connections to the community, leadership expertise, and skills
related to their chosen fields.

Our region needs more of what I saw on
Wednesday at the Leadership Institute—young professionals learning how to
affect change in our area—and more of what I saw on Thursday in Galena—city,
county, and state leaders joining forces to develop a unified view of economic
obstacles and ways those obstacles can be overcome.

And we need more than just the leaders
to join forces. We need young people to imagine great ideas and then implement
them. We need business people to continue to grow their businesses, hire new
employees, and then reinvest in the community. We need retirees, with their
wisdom acquired over a lifetime, to mentor the next generation.

Economic change requires action. And
action requires people. “No man is an island,” wrote John Donne, late sixteenth
and early seventeenth century poet, “every man is a piece of the continent, a part of the
main.” Each individual in our region has the opportunity to make a positive
impact; and each choice will have a ripple effect. We can stimulate our
region’s economy, but it will require every person making a choice to
contribute.

If you participated in an
internship or an apprenticeship program, let me hear your story and the
benefits of your experience on Facebook this week.

The
99th General Assembly convened for inauguration this past week in
Springfield. Wednesday, January 14th,
I took my oath of office, along with the other 117 members of the Illinois
House of Representatives. The pomp and
circumstance of the entire production was impressive and well organized.

I
want to note again that I appreciate your confidence in me as your State
Representative. I am thankful for the
honor and privilege of representing approximately 108,000 Illinois citizens. The weight of responsibility is one I bear
proudly, but the gravity of having a single voice for so many citizens is
humbling, and I want to reiterate my gratitude for your support in electing me
your Representative.

I
realize I cannot always vote to make everyone in the 89th district
happy, but I can assure you, I consider each and every bill that comes before
the House with an open mind and evaluate the positive and negative impacts that
will occur in our communities. Even the
legislation that passes unanimously must be given heavy scrutiny to ensure new
laws will benefit our state, our communities, and our people.

I’m
excited to say that I think better times are in store for our state: our new
Governor, Bruce Rauner, was sworn in on Monday, and the tone of this first week
of the 99th General Assembly was one of bipartisanship. Governor Rauner has the business acumen,
intellect, and compassion to lead our State back to prosperous times. He has the ability to reach across party lines
and take a stand for the people of our State. I had dinner with him on Wednesday night and
had great conversation, and while we both agree very tough decisions lie ahead,
I believe in his leadership and in his vision for our great State. I look forward to working closely with
Governor Rauner to ensure Illinois moves aggressively forward down a path to
prosperity for all the people of Illinois.

The
beginning of a new session is a fresh start to introduce new legislation, and
while there are many more steps until we are successful, I’d like to outline
two legislative priorities for 2015. While pension reform, the budget deficit,
and a capital plan to renew our infrastructure are always first and our top
priorities, these topics are so broad that I will wait until I can outline them
in detail for you in a future column.

I
will be introducing legislation to improve our education system and to allow a
greater pool of teaching talent into the State.
Currently, new teachers who earned their college degree out-of-state
have an exceptionally difficult time getting licensed in the State of Illinois to
teach our children. The current model
hinders the ability of rural school districts like the ones in our area to
recruit and fill positions because, unintentionally, we limit the number of
available teachers here in Illinois.

The
current law is a prime example of the law of unintended consequences: the
legislature and the Board of Education have implemented seemingly good policies
that negatively impact our community. I’ve
listened to too many testimonials from current teachers, principals, and superintendents
that we can’t find chemistry or agri-business teachers for our children. These are not the only examples, but they
speak to a problem I hope to solve with bipartisan support. I will be reaching across the aisle to move
this forward and assist our local education leaders in providing a quality
education to our children.

The
second piece of legislation I plan to introduce will be photo identification
for public assistance programs. I
believe in a strong safety net to assist the most impoverished in our cities,
and I also believe in the good nature and hard work of people. Call me foolish, but as a small business
owner, I know people appreciate and feel valued when they have a career and an
opportunity to better themselves. Until
we can pass a pro-jobs agenda that will help every single able-bodied person in
our state to find employment, those who are receiving financial aid, housing,
and food provisions from the State of Illinois should be issued a card with
photo identification.

I
see this as a two-fold measure. It will
first provide an additional state-issued form of identification for those in
need of public assistance, similar to a state ID card, but with safety-net
benefits. It will also reduce fraud. Without a strict control on who uses the card,
how can we in good faith allot money to a debit card that could be stolen, sold
or used by others? As a good steward of your tax money, the State cannot allow
welfare fraud to happen. The system is
set up to assist people back to their feet, and I refuse to let those most
vulnerable succumb to the villains that would abuse the system.

As
I write this week about moving the state forward I am reminded of a quote by
Martin Luther King Jr., whom we honor this Monday. Dr. King said “If you can’t fly, then run, if
you can’t run, then walk, if you can’t walk, then crawl but whatever you do,
you have to keep moving forward.”

I
wrote a column recently on Illinois’ Secure Choice Savings Plan and received
some negative feedback. While I may not
agree with the newly-minted retirement plan, I am thankful for freedom of
speech and am glad we live in a country where we are allowed to have our own
opinions. I encourage the discussion fostered
by differing opinions.

I
would like to continue the conversation on the Secure Choice Savings Plan by
offering some more perspective on some of the arguments that have been used in
favor of the plan.

One
argument for the program is that it encourages personal responsibility. While I understand that it is imperative for
Americans to start doing a better job of saving for retirement, a bill that
requires businesses to participate and automatically opts employees in unless
they choose to opt out does not encourage personal responsibility. Instead, it increases the responsibilities of
government and the dependence of the people on the government to make their
decisions for them. If we were really
trying to encourage personal responsibility, we would teach our people about
the importance of saving for retirement, and we would introduce them to
financial firms that already do a good job of investing retirement funds in the
right places (and have lower administration fees, I might add). One caveat from this point—if you think the
average Illinoisan’s saving habits are dismal, just look at Illinois’ saving
habits. The state can’t even save enough
to adequately fund public employee pensions. Before it starts sticking its fingers in
private sector savings, it should start managing its own finances more
responsibly.

Another
argument in favor of the program is that it gives small businesses a
competitive edge. The program does allow small businesses who can’t afford the
costs of 401Ks to compete with larger businesses that can offer comprehensive
benefit packages. The Secure Choice
Savings Plan does not, however, match employee contributions like larger
businesses’ 401K plans, so, essentially, this plan is no different than a
savings plan employees without 401Ks could find through private-sector
financial firms. Additionally, these
small businesses, many of whom are already overwhelmed by government
regulation, will “have to spend time and effort to set up and implement [the
plan],” according to the National Federation of Independent Businesses. The NFIB also states that “any mandate that
would add complexity and disrupt these [small business’s] efficiency and
productivity is very troublesome and unwise.” Small businesses may also be “considered plan
fiduciaries and would be subject to the same compliance laws, associated costs
and liabilities as the state,” says the NFIB, implying that if an employee
feels fiduciary obligations are not being met, he could sue the state and his
employer.

Proponents
of the Secure Choice Savings Plan also say that the state of Illinois will not
control the retirement plan, but I beg to differ. The fund will be managed by a seven-member
board which will consist of the state treasurer, the state comptroller, the
Office of Management and Budget director, and four additional gubernatorial
appointees who can be hired and fired “based on political considerations,”
according to the Illinois Policy Institute. The board is essentially controlled by whoever
controls the state of Illinois.

One
final argument for the Secure Choice Savings Plan that I would like you to
consider is that it will cost the taxpayer nothing. First of all, what law passed by the
government of Illinois in recent years has really cost taxpayers nothing? And
secondly, while the Office of Management and Budget’s note on the bill
“indicates no fiscal impact on the theory that private interests or the federal
government” will fund the $15 million to $20 million startup costs, according
to the Illinois Policy Institute, there is no guarantee that funds will not be
appropriated from the state’s general fund and, in fact, the bill allows for
the program to be funded by the state, if necessary. So yes, this bill may not
cost the taxpayer a penny if full federal or private funding comes through. But if it doesn’t, we’ll be out another $20
million, and I honestly can’t remember the last time the state paid back a debt
to its taxpayers in full. Don’t we still
owe the pension funds $110 billion and still counting?

Ronald
Reagan once said that “government exists to protect us from each other. Where
government has gone beyond its limits is in deciding to protect us from
ourselves.” I firmly believe the Secure
Choice Savings Plan is an instance of government going beyond its limits in an
effort to protect the people of Illinois from their ability to choose to save
or to not save for retirement.

In a few days, I’ll be heading back to
Springfield for a special session called by Governor Quinn. The Governor wants
the General Assembly to pass legislation to allow for a special election to
replace Comptroller Topinka. Here’s a
little background: when Comptroller Topinka passed in December, Governor Quinn
wanted the authority to appoint a person to finish off Comptroller Topinka’s
current term and to replace her for the coming term. When it was determined he did not have that
authority but was only given power to appoint a person to finish off the
current term, he decided a special session was in order so he could at least have
some control over the fate of the comptroller position.

And now for the facts: my fellow
Republican State Representative Robert Pritchard (R-Hinckley) said in an
article he wrote for the Elburn Herald
that this special session will cost the state around $50,000—money that could
be better spent elsewhere and that for sure doesn’t need to be spent on a
special session. The proposed special
election for comptroller would not happen until November 2016 in our next
statewide election, so there isn’t an urgent need to do anything
immediately. Everything that could be
done on January 8 can also be done when the General Assembly is called for our
99th Session after inauguration.

In addition, the proposed special election
will be unconstitutional—the constitution calls for vacancies to be filled by
the governor’s appointment. The General
Assembly is not authorized, according to a statement from the House and Senate
Republican Leaders, “to order a special election to fill a vacancy or replace a
person who is appointed to fill a vacancy.” If the General Assembly passes a
special election bill, the state will likely face litigation on the
constitutionality of the bill. The only
way around litigation is to create a well-thought-out constitutional amendment
and to allow voters to vote on it in 2016.

You may have heard the old proverb
“haste makes waste,” or maybe you like William Shakespeare’s fancier version of
the proverb from Romeo and Juliet:
“wisely and slow; they stumble that run fast.” In this case, both sayings hold
true—the Governor’s haste to push through legislation creates an initial waste
of $50,000 or more dollars. On top of
that, we’ll have potential litigation costs and perhaps the intangible cost of
poorly-planned legislation. All of these
costs could be avoided if we simply waited a few more weeks to begin the
process of creating and drafting legislation or a possible constitutional
amendment. Unless of course there is a
hidden agenda of other legislation waiting to surface. Stay tuned……